Post on 04-Apr-2022
1
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT OF POLICE
Chapter 3.29 CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT OF POLICE
3.29.005 Purpose – Enhancing and sustaining effective civilian oversight
Because the police are granted extraordinary power, including the use of force and the authority to
constrain personal liberty, and because civilian oversight of police is critically important to
enhancing the trust, respect, and confidence of the community, it is the City’s intent to ensure by
law rather than solely by policy or directive a comprehensive, independent, and sustained approach
to civilian oversight of the Seattle Police Department (SPD). It is the purpose of this Chapter 3.29
to provide the authority necessary for that oversight to be as effective as possible.
Civilian oversight of SPD shall be comprised of an Office of Police Accountability (OPA) to handle
complaints of misconduct, an Office of Inspector General (OIG) to provide systemic oversight of the
management, practices, and policies of SPD and OPA, and the Community Police Commission (CPC)
to provide community input so that police services are delivered in a lawful and nondiscriminatory
manner and are aligned with community values and expectations.
3.29.007 Court Review and Effective Date
This legislation shall take effect [XXXX] (xx) days after enactment unless further delay in
implementation in whole or in part is directed by the court in United States of America v. City of
Seattle, No 2:12-cv-01282-JLR (W.D. Wash.).
Subchapter I Office of Police Accountability
3.29.010 Office of Police Accountability established – Purpose and authority
A. There is established as a separate and independent office of the City an OPA, whose
Director and Deputy Director shall be civilians, to provide oversight, guidance, and
leadership in matters related to police accountability for SPD. OPA shall help ensure
that the actions of SPD employees are constitutional; comply with federal, State, and
local laws, and City and SPD policies; and are respectful, effective, and conducive to
the public good. The work of OPA is intended to instill confidence and public trust in
the fairness and integrity of the police accountability system and in the effectiveness
and professionalism of SPD.
B. OPA shall establish and manage processes to receive and investigate allegations of
police misconduct that are fair, impartial, consistent, thorough, timely, understandable,
transparent, and accessible for the public, employees, and complainants. OPA policies
and practices shall apply equally to all SPD employees regardless of rank or position,
and shall be detailed in an OPA Internal Operations and Training Manual (OPA
Manual) which shall be posted publicly online and reviewed and updated annually in
consultation with the OIG and the CPC.
C. OPA shall receive and have the authority to initiate complaints of misconduct or policy
violations against SPD employees, and resolve those complaints in accordance with the
2
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
OPA Manual through investigation, Supervisor Action referral, mediation, rapid
adjudication, and/or other alternative resolution processes, as well as Management
Action findings issued in relation to both sustained and not sustained findings, and
Training referrals that provide effective solutions and help reduce future misconduct or
policy violations.
D. OPA’s jurisdiction shall include all types of possible misconduct, including criminal
misconduct. OPA shall have responsibility to oversee investigations of allegations of
criminal misconduct and in such cases shall coordinate with prosecutors on a case-by-
case basis to ensure that the most effective, thorough, and rigorous criminal and
administrative investigations are conducted.
E. OPA shall have the authority to observe or review all administrative investigation
processes at SPD to ensure they are not in conflict with OPA’s authority and are
consistent with the purposes of this Chapter 3.29.
F. OPA shall support the appropriate role of SPD line supervisors in the accountability
system, including their responsibilities to mentor employees and to investigate,
document, and address minor policy violations, performance, and customer service
concerns at the precinct or unit level. OPA’s precinct liaison program shall employ
civilian OPA staff with professional expertise to work directly with supervisors and
others in the precincts to support the fair and consistent handling of such minor
violations and concerns.
G. OPA shall audit how lower level policy violations are addressed by SPD supervisors, to
assess their completeness, fairness, consistency, and appropriateness. OPA shall have
discretion to investigate any specific policy violation it chooses, regardless of the level
of seriousness so that all policy violations are appropriately addressed, but with
supervisors usually handling minor performance issues and OPA focusing its
investigative resources on cases involving more serious allegations and maintaining
general oversight of all SPD accountability systems.
H. OPA shall identify and make recommendations to correct systemic problems in SPD
policies, training, supervision, and management identified in the course of OPA’s
investigation of possible misconduct or policy violations, or OPA’s other obligations
under this Chapter 3.29, to help improve SPD standards and enhance employee conduct.
I. OPA shall release information associated with its completed investigations as quickly
as legally and practically possible, and in a manner that is consistent with the concept
and values of “open source data.”
J. OPA shall collaborate with SPD in the development and delivery of SPD in-service
training related to the accountability system and ensure that this training is part of the
curriculum for all new employees.
3.29.015 Office of Police Accountability – Independence
A. OPA shall be organizationally housed in SPD in order to enhance complete and
3
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
immediate access to all SPD-controlled data, evidence, and personnel necessary for
thorough and timely investigations, but shall operate completely independent of SPD in
all respects.
B. The OPA Director and OPA staff shall exercise their discretionary and investigatory
responsibilities without interference from any person, group, or organization, including
the Chief of Police, other SPD employees, or other City officials, except that the OPA
Director and OPA staff shall be subject to oversight as set forth in this Chapter 3.29.
Any person who violates these provisions may be subject to dismissal, discipline, or
censure consistent with City and State laws.
C. The OPA Director shall have authority for the hiring, supervision, and discharge of all
civilian staff and for the selection, supervision, and transfer back to SPD of any sworn
staff assigned to OPA. All OPA precinct liaison and complainant navigator staff shall
be civilians, and intake personnel, investigator, and investigative supervisor positions
shall each be entirely civilian or a mix of civilian and sworn, in whatever staffing
configuration best provides for continuity, flexibility, leadership opportunity, and
specialized expertise, and supports public trust in the complaint-handling process. All
staff shall have the requisite skills and abilities necessary for OPA to fulfill its duties
and obligations set forth in this Chapter 3.29 and for OPA’s operational effectiveness,
and no civilian staff shall be required to have sworn experience. The rotation of any
sworn staff into and out of OPA shall be managed in a way that maintains continuity
and expertise, professionalism, orderly case management, and OPA effectiveness.
D. An annual budget to support sufficient staffing and resources for effective OPA
operations shall be based on not less than x percent (x%) of SPD’s annual
appropriations. The OPA Director shall have budget and program control of OPA
operations.
E. OPA’s physical location and all communications shall reflect its independence, the
impartiality of its investigators, and promote public access and transparency.
3.29.020 Office of Police Accountability – Director
A. The duties of the OPA Director are to:
1. Manage all functions and responsibilities of OPA.
2. Manage the complaint process so that all complaints of police misconduct or
policy violations are initiated, received, referred, classified, and resolved or
investigated appropriately.
3. Prepare and annually update, in consultation with the OIG and the CPC, the OPA
Manual that details OPA policies and procedures, and ensure OPA processes are
in compliance with the OPA Manual.
4. Oversee and strengthen the effectiveness of OPA investigations, Supervisor
Action referrals, mediation, rapid adjudication, and other alternative resolution
4
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
processes, as well as Management Actions and Training Referrals. The OPA
Director shall collaborate with the CPC and OIG to implement improvements,
consistent with best practices, to make and maintain a fair and effective mediation
program and a fair and effective rapid adjudication process.
5. Direct OPA investigative processes employing best practices for administrative
investigations and in compliance with the OPA Manual and the purposes of this
Chapter 3.29. All SPD employees shall be required to fully participate in an
investigation whenever requested by OPA, under the authority of the Chief of
Police, and failure to do so may result in discipline, up to and including
termination. Complainants may remain anonymous and must be given the choice
of an in-person interview; all SPD employee interviews shall be conducted in-
person. All interviews shall be audio-recorded and transcribed, with both the
recording and the transcription retained in the OPA case file.
6. Classify complaints; address any additional investigative work requested or
directed by the OIG; certify in writing the completion and recommended findings
of all OPA investigations and convey these recommendations to the Chief of
Police; participate in meetings related to recommended findings and discipline
and in due process hearings; and testify as needed in disciplinary appeals.
7. Ensure that every OPA investigation has an investigation plan approved by the
OPA Director prior to the initiation of an investigation. Such plans shall include
the witnesses to be interviewed, the perishable evidence to be prioritized, other
material evidence to be obtained, and the approach to addressing each allegation
of possible policy violation or misconduct. If OPA is unable to investigate an
allegation in the manner the OPA Director believes appropriate due to resource
constraints in light of other investigation priorities, the investigation plan and case
file should indicate that this intentional decision is being made regarding
allocation of investigative resources.
8. In order for the accountability system to best serve the public, complainants, and
SPD employees by completing investigations in a timely manner, consistently
apply OPA deadlines, including investigation deadlines, tolling of investigation
deadlines, and extensions to investigation deadlines.
a. OPA shall notify the named employee(s), the Captain or equivalent of
the named employee(s), and the bargaining unit of the named
employee(s) within thirty (30) days of receiving directly or by referral
a complaint of possible misconduct or policy violation. The notice shall
not include the name and address of the complainant if the complainant
is a member of the public. The notice shall confirm the complaint and
enumerate allegations which allow the named employee(s) to begin to
prepare for the OPA investigation; however, if OPA subsequently
identifies additional allegations not listed in the thirty (30) day notice,
these may also be addressed in the investigation.
b. The time period in which investigations must be completed by OPA in
5
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
order for discipline to be imposed is 180 days. The time period begins
on the date OPA initiates a complaint, a complaint is filed with OPA, or
a complaint should have been referred to OPA by an SPD employee or
an SPD administrative investigation unit such as force review or
collision review. The time period ends on the date the OPA Director
issues proposed findings.
c. SPD employees shall timely refer incidents involving possible policy
violations and misconduct to OPA. Members of any SPD unit or board
with authority to conduct administrative investigations or review
compliance with policy also have a responsibility for ensuring complete
and timely referral to OPA of any incident they review that involves
such potential misconduct or policy violation. Failure to timely refer
shall also constitute misconduct subject to complaint and investigation
under this Chapter 3.29. If the failure by an SPD employee to timely
refer results in OPA being unable to complete an investigation within
180 days, OPA shall initiate a complaint and investigation of this
allegation with an investigation timeline of the later of a) 180 days
following the end of the 180-day period for the underlying, untimely-
referred alleged misconduct or b) 180 days following the determination
that the 180-day deadline was missed due to a failure to timely refer.
d. OPA investigation deadlines may be tolled in cases involving possible
criminal actions. Tolling will occur when an OPA administrative
investigation does not commence or is paused in order to allow a
criminal investigation of the same incident to proceed. The 180-day
clock shall resume whenever any administrative investigation steps are
taken by OPA.
e. Investigations required by the OIG for review and certification shall be
provided as soon as possible after the investigator submits them, to
afford sufficient time for OPA to conduct additional investigation if
requested or directed by the OIG, or to investigate new material
evidence appropriately raised by the named employee during a due
process hearing. Any further investigation shall be re-submitted to the
OIG for review in a timely manner, so as not to lessen the quality of
the investigation due to the passage of time and to meet all contractual
deadlines so that additional investigation does not foreclose the
possibility of discipline being imposed.
f. To ensure the integrity and thoroughness of investigations and the
appropriateness of disciplinary decisions, additional information shall
not be allowed into the record after the OPA investigation has concluded
if it was known to the named employee or the named employee’s
bargaining representative during the OPA investigation. The named
employee or the named employee’s bargaining representative shall
disclose during the investigative process any witness or evidence they
are then aware of that they believe to be material and may not otherwise
6
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
raise it later in a due process hearing, grievance, or appeal.
g. If further investigation is needed because new information is brought
forward in an OPA interview or a due process hearing, or because
additional investigation is directed by the OIG or new evidence is
surfaced from such additional investigation, OPA shall have an
additional sixty (60) days for each instance that additional investigation
is required, beyond the 180-day deadline, to complete that work and
provide it for final review by the OIG.
h. Termination is the presumed discipline for a finding of dishonesty upon
clear and convincing evidence. Should the circumstances of a sustained
finding of dishonesty result in discipline other than termination,
however, the standard of proof shall be by a preponderance of the
evidence.
9. Make written recommendations to the Chief of Police with regard to findings
upon completion of investigations, and, where requested, advise the Chief as to
discipline and the Chief and City Attorney with regard to disciplinary appeals.
10. In cases where a sustained finding has been recommended by the OPA Director
and hearing from the complainant would help the Chief of Police better
understand the significance of the concern or weigh issues of credibility,
recommend that the Chief meet with the complainant prior to the Chief making
final findings and disciplinary decisions.
11. Establish in the OPA Manual a protocol for referral to the OIG any complaints
involving OPA staff that cannot be handled within OPA due to a potential conflict
of interest for classification and appropriate complaint-handling, such as
Supervisor Action, investigation, or alternative resolution.
12. With respect to the OIG’s responsibilities to review OPA cases, provide the OIG
the following specific data:
a. Each year in June and December status reports regarding a) all OPA
cases which were referred by OPA for possible criminal investigations
during the previous six months and b) all OPA cases which were
referred by OPA for possible criminal investigations in earlier periods
and for which investigations remained open at any time during the
current reporting period. These status reports shall include the nature
of the criminal allegation, the case number, the named employee(s),
the date of complaint, the timeliness of the criminal investigation, and
the current status of the case.
b. Each year in June and December status reports regarding a) all OPA
cases in which the findings or discipline have been appealed during the
previous six months and b) all OPA cases in which the findings or
discipline have been appealed in earlier periods and that remained open
7
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
at any time during the current reporting period. These status reports
shall include all OPA cases not yet closed due to appeal, the case
number, the named employee(s), the date of complaint, the date of
disciplinary action, the Chief of Police disciplinary decision, the date
of appeal, the nature of the appeal, and the current status of the case,
including any modification to the case disposition as a result of appeal.
13. Review and report on the effectiveness, accessibility, timeliness, transparency,
and responsiveness of the complaint system.
14. The OPA Director shall work with the OIG and SPD to ensure that SPD’s
disciplinary processes are fair, objective, certain, timely, and effective.
15. The OPA Director shall work with the OIG, SPD, and the City Attorney’s Office
to help reduce or prevent misconduct through identification of patterns or trends
arising through complaints, investigations, and lawsuits, and, without waiving
any attorney-client privilege, shall report to the public recommendations made by
OPA to City officials based on those patterns or trends.
16. Only the OPA Director shall comment publicly on the status of OPA cases under
investigation. This does not preclude the Chief of Police, the City Attorney, the
Mayor, Councilmembers, or other City employees from acknowledging a case
has been referred to OPA.
17. Personally respond to the scene of all SPD officer-involved shootings and other
serious use of force incidents or designate OPA staff member(s) to do so. At the
incident scene, OPA representative(s) shall have access to the scene to the extent
that they request it to ascertain and assess whether possible violations of SPD
policies may have occurred. Following such incidents, OPA representative(s)
may attend and participate in any SPD administrative investigation unit
interviews or meetings, including Force Review Board meetings, held to review
Force Investigation Team (FIT) information or discuss the incident, and may
identify any areas of concern related to possible violations of SPD policies. OPA
may respond to the scene and participate in SPD administrative investigation unit
interviews or meetings of any other incident, at the OPA Director’s discretion.
18. When necessary, issue a subpoena at any stage in an investigation if evidence or
testimony material to the investigation is not provided to OPA voluntarily, in
order to compel non-SPD witnesses to produce such evidence or testimony. If the
subpoenaed individual or entity does not respond to the request in a timely
manner, the OPA Director may ask for the assistance of the City Attorney to
pursue enforcement of the subpoena through a court of competent jurisdiction.
19. Manage OPA with the goal that OPA maintain frequent and regular
communications with complainants and named employees about the status of
their investigation, including information to complainants about disciplinary
appeal and grievance processes. Report to complainants and the public on the
outcome of any such processes that result in the modification of final findings
8
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
and discipline determinations.
20. Ensure that investigators and investigative supervisors receive orientation and
training, as they transition into OPA, on administrative investigation best
practices, including the importance of open-ended non-leading questions, critical
follow-up, and other techniques; the importance of being respectful to all;
interacting and communicating with complainants, witnesses, and employees in
fair ways; exercising independence and objectivity; and having expertise on
tactics, equipment, and relevant procedures, policies and law. OPA investigators
and investigative supervisors shall receive training by professional instructors
outside SPD in best practices in administrative and police practices
investigations. OPA investigators and investigative supervisors shall also receive
in-house training on current SPD and OPA policies and procedures.
21. Maintain a robust and easily navigable website; and conduct community outreach
to inform the public about the police accountability system and how to access it.
Collaborate with the CPC to regularly update and provide OPA informational
materials that are readily understandable and widely available to Seattle’s diverse
residents both in English and in translation. Obtain information about community
perspectives and concerns germane to OPA access and OPA’s oversight
responsibilities by coordinating with the CPC on community outreach and
receiving feedback from the CPC on issues surfaced as a result of its community
outreach activities.
22. Facilitate access to the accountability system, including the use of OPA
complainant navigators and community-based organizations reflecting the
diversity of Seattle’s diverse communities to provide additional channels for
filing complaints and support understanding of the system and how to access it.
23. Consistent with any obligations to maintain confidentiality, brief the CPC on
issues of significant public interest related to police accountability and
professional conduct.
24. Advise the Mayor, City Attorney, City Council, Chief of Police, Inspector
General, and the CPC on issues related to the purposes of this Chapter 3.29, and
recommend and promote to policymakers changes to policies and practices,
collective bargaining agreements, City ordinances, and State laws in order to
support systemic improvements and other enhancements to SPD performance and
in furtherance of community trust.
25. Provide technical assistance to the CPC, as requested.
26. Work with the Chief of Police and other SPD leadership to strengthen the
involvement of supervisory personnel in the accountability system so as to build
a culture of accountability throughout SPD.
9
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
B. Qualifications.
The OPA Director shall be a civilian with significant legal, investigative, human resources,
law enforcement oversight, or prosecutorial experience and shall also have the following
additional qualifications and characteristics:
1. A reputation for integrity and professionalism, and the ability to maintain a high
standard of integrity and professionalism in the office;
2. A commitment to and knowledge of the need for and responsibilities of law
enforcement, including enforcement and care-taking, and the need to protect the
basic constitutional rights of all affected parties;
3. A commitment to the statements of purpose and policies in this Chapter 3.29;
4. A history of leadership experience;
5. The ability to relate, communicate, and engage effectively with and gain the
respect of all who have a stake in policing, including, but not limited to, the
general public, complainants, disenfranchised communities, SPD employees, and
relevant City and other officials including the Mayor, City Council, City
Attorney, Chief of Police, Inspector General, and the CPC;
6. An understanding of the city’s ethnic and socio-economic diversity and proven
experience working with and valuing the perspectives of diverse groups and
individuals; and
7. The ability to exercise sound judgment, independence, fairness, and objectivity,
and to carry out the duties of the OPA Director in a manner that is perceived by
all who have a stake in policing as exercising sound judgment, independence,
fairness, and objectivity in an environment where controversy is common.
C. Appointment, removal, and compensation.
1. The OPA Director shall be appointed and reappointed by the Mayor, subject to
confirmation by a majority affirmative vote of the City Council. The CPC shall
serve as the search committee for the OPA Director, identifying up to three
qualified finalists using merit-based criteria. In the event the search committee
does not identify a sufficient number of qualified finalists, the Mayor rejects the
finalists offered, or the City Council does not confirm an appointee, the search
committee shall conduct a subsequent search for up to three qualified finalists.
Prior to the Mayor selecting an appointee from among the finalists, a public
meeting shall be convened to allow community members to ask questions and
hear from the finalists their perspectives on their qualifications and the
requirements of the position. Following the public meeting, the Mayor may
appoint from among the finalists. The Mayor shall consult with the CPC prior
to reappointments. The OPA Director shall assume office upon receiving City
Council confirmation.
10
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
2. The OPA Director may be appointed and reappointed for up to three, four-year
terms for a total of twelve years, each year commencing on July 1st. The terms
shall be set to commence in years separate from the Mayor’s term of office. If
the OPA Director assumes office mid-term due to a prior vacancy, the OPA
Director may complete that term and then be reappointed for up to three, four-
year subsequent terms.
3. Each appointment and reappointment shall be made whenever possible
sufficiently prior to the expiration of the latest incumbent's term of office,
permitting City Council action to approve or disapprove the appointment or
reappointment at least forty-five (45) days before the expiration of the present
term, so as to have a seamless transition without a gap in oversight.
4. Within five (5) business days after a vacancy occurs or the Mayor learns that a
vacancy is expected to occur, the Mayor shall provide written notice of the
vacancy or expected vacancy to the CPC which shall commence recruitment of
candidates to fill the vacancy.
5. Within one hundred and twenty (120) days of notice by the Mayor, the CPC
shall identify an initial set of qualified finalists and forward to the Mayor their
resumes and other relevant information, including criteria relied on by the CPC
in choosing the finalists. The CPC may rank the finalists and summarize the
particular strengths of each candidate. The Mayor shall provide written notice
to the CPC within fifteen (15) days after receiving its initial list of finalists if
additional candidates should be identified. The City Council shall provide
written notice to the CPC within five (5) business days of its action to not
confirm an appointee.
6. In the event of a vacancy, the Mayor shall designate an interim OPA Director
within thirty (30) days after a vacancy occurs to serve until a new OPA Director
is appointed. The interim OPA Director may be either an OPA employee or an
individual from outside OPA, but must meet the qualifications in this Section
3.29.020.
7. To strengthen the independence of the OPA Director, the Mayor may remove
the OPA Director from office only for cause, and in accordance with the
following provisions. The Mayor shall give written notice, specifying the basis
for the intended removal, to the OPA Director, the City Council, the Inspector
General, and the CPC. Within ten (10) days after receipt of the notice, the OPA
Director may file with the City Council a request for a hearing on the cause for
removal. The OPA Director’s request for a hearing shall be delivered at the same
time to the Mayor, the Inspector General, and to the CPC Executive Director
and CPC co-chairs. If such request is made, the City Council shall convene a
hearing on the cause for removal not sooner than thirty (30) days and not more
than sixty (60) days following the OPA Director’s request for a hearing, at which
the OPA Director may appear, be represented by publicly funded counsel, and
be heard. Following the Mayor’s notice, and any hearing held at the request of
the OPA Director, the City Council shall finalize its de novo review of the
11
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
grounds for removal and by a majority vote of its members approve or not
approve the removal within thirty (30) days of the hearing if held, or if no
hearing is held, within thirty (30) days of receiving notice of the intended
removal from the Mayor, following input from the Inspector General and the
CPC.
8. The OPA Director shall be paid a salary consistent with the level of
responsibility established in this Section 3.29.020.
9. The Seattle Department of Human Resources shall obtain from an outside law
enforcement agency a thorough background check of nominees for OPA
Director identified by the Mayor and report the results to the Mayor, prior to
submittal of the nomination to the City Council for confirmation.
3.29.025 Office of Police Accountability – Explanations of certain complaint dispositions
A. If the Chief of Police decides not to follow the OPA Director's written recommendations
on findings following an OPA investigation, the Chief shall provide a written statement
of the material reasons for the decision. If the basis for the action is personal, involving
family or health-related circumstances about the named employee, the statement shall
refer to “personal circumstances” as the basis. The Chief of Police shall make this
written statement within thirty (30) days of the Chief’s decision. The written statement
shall be provided to the Mayor, City Councilmembers, the City Attorney, the OPA
Director, and the Inspector General, and be included in the OPA case file and in a
communication with the complainant and the public. If any findings or discipline
resulting from an investigation are changed pursuant to an appeal or grievance, this
responsibility shall rest with the City Attorney.
B. If no discipline results from an OPA complaint because an investigation time limit
specified in a collective bargaining agreement between the City and the named
employee’s bargaining unit has been exceeded, within thirty (30) days of the final
certification of the investigation by the OPA Director, the OPA Director shall make a
written statement of the nature of the allegations in the complaint and the reason or
reasons why the time limit was exceeded. This requirement applies whether the OPA
Director recommended the complaint be sustained, not sustained, or declined to make a
recommendation because the time limit had been exceeded. The written statement shall
be included in the OPA case file and provided to the Mayor, City Councilmembers, the
City Attorney, and the Inspector General, and included in a communication with the
complainant and the public.
C. The written statements required by this Section 3.29.025 shall not identify named
employees or divulge personal information about named employees or anyone else
involved in the complaint and shall be subject to any applicable confidentiality
requirements in State or federal law. The statements shall not affect any discipline
decisions; the Chief of Police remains the final SPD decision maker in disciplinary
actions.
12
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
D. The OPA Director shall include summaries of the written statements required by this
Section 3.29.025 in the OPA Director’s reports required by this Chapter 3.29. The
summaries shall be consistent with any applicable confidentiality requirements in State
or federal law.
3.29.030 Office of Police Accountability – Reporting
A. Timely and informative reporting to the public and its elected officials by OPA is
important to sustain public trust, help the City's police accountability system function
effectively, and allow for regular and continuous improvement. The OPA Director shall
collaborate with the CPC to make OPA reports readily understandable, and focused on
issues and trends of most concern to the public and stakeholders. The reports should be
delivered through channels that are easily accessible to the broad public.
B. OPA’s website shall be easily navigable and contain comprehensive, substantive, and
timely information on matters of public interest concerning SPD’s accountability
system, including information about the OIG and the CPC and links to their websites.
C. OPA shall post online, in a timely manner, summaries of completed investigations,
including the allegations, the analysis, the findings, and the results of disciplinary
appeals; and shall distribute a compilation of these summaries electronically, no less
than once a month, to interested stakeholders.
D. OPA shall forward to the CPC and post online Management Actions at the time they are
issued, and forward to the CPC and post online timely updates on the outcome of
Management Actions directed as a result of OPA investigations or complaints, including
the status of changes recommended to SPD policies or practices.
E. Report quarterly to the Mayor, City Council, OIG, and the CPC on the implementation
of, or response to, OPA recommendations for Management Actions, Training Referrals,
and other policy and practice improvements, providing information on their status and
whether follow-through was timely and substantive.
F. OPA shall post online and electronically distribute an annual report to the Mayor, City
Attorney, City Council, Chief of Police, Inspector General, and the CPC, as well as to
the City Clerk for filing as a public record. This report shall describe the work of OPA
and include any OPA Director recommendations for changes in policies and practices,
collective bargaining agreements, City ordinances, and State law. The annual report
shall also detail the implementation status of any previous OPA policy and practice
recommendations to SPD or other City departments and agencies. The annual report
shall also summarize information received from community outreach which has
informed its work.
G. The OPA Director’s annual report shall include the following, which may be modified
in consultation with the CPC if it is determined that other information would better help
public understanding:
1. The number and percentage of all complaints by classification and nature of
13
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
allegation received by OPA;
2. The number and percentage of all complaints and allegations sustained and the
specific disciplinary or other remedial action taken in sustained cases;
3. The number and percentage of cases which were not certified as thorough,
timely, and objective by the OIG, including actions taken by the OPA Director
to reduce the number of not certified cases.
4. The number and percentage of cases which were appealed or grieved, and the
number and percentage of these cases in which findings and/or discipline
determinations were changed, and the nature of those changes, as a result of
appeals or for other reasons;
5. The number and percentage of all complaints and allegations not sustained, and
the basis for all not sustained findings, e.g., unfounded, inconclusive, lawful and
proper;
6. The number and percentage of all complaints handled directly by frontline
supervisors, referred for Supervisor Action, Management Action, training or
alternative resolution;
7. The geographic and shift distribution of incidents underlying complaints;
8. The racial, ethnic, gender, and geographic distributions of complainants, as this
information is provided voluntarily by complainants;
9. The racial, ethnic, gender, assignment, shift and seniority distributions of named
employees who are subjects of complaints;
10. The number of named employees who have received two or more sustained
complaints within one year;
11. The timeliness, thoroughness, and effectiveness of certain OPA and SPD
processes, including but not limited to, OPA investigations; complaints referred
by OPA for Supervisor Action; complaints handled directly by frontline
supervisors; Supervisor Action referrals; mediations, rapid adjudication, and
other alternative resolution processes; and Management Actions and Training
Referrals;
12. Patterns and trends in all OPA complaints, including year-to-year comparisons
of demographic data that can help identify problems, deter misconduct, and
inform SPD policy and practice improvements; and
13. A summary of all cases of significant public concern related to public confidence
and trust, including the outcome of reviews by SPD units of officer-involved
shootings and in-custody deaths.
14
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
H. The OPA Director shall make available to the OIG and the CPC information necessary
for their respective auditing and oversight functions set forth in this Chapter 3.29, in a
timeframe allowing for the timely performance of those auditing and oversight
functions.
3.29.035 Office of Police Accountability – Meetings
A. The OPA Director shall meet with the CPC, its committees, and/or staff regularly, and
at the CPC’s request, to provide and receive information concerning SPD and the police
accountability system, and the extent to which the purposes and requirements of this
Chapter 3.29 are being met. The OPA Director shall review the OPA annual reports,
recommendations, and the implementation status of those recommendations in these
meetings with the CPC.
B. The OPA Director shall meet periodically with the Mayor, City Attorney, City Council,
and Chief of Police to advise on the investigatory and disciplinary functions of OPA
and SPD and make recommendations to improve OPA and SPD policies and practices,
consistent with the purposes of this Chapter 3.29.
3.29.040 Office of Police Accountability – Confidentiality of files and records
The OPA Director and all OPA staff, consultants, and experts hired by OPA shall keep confidential
the identity of all complainants, named employees, and witnesses, as well as all documents, files,
records, and data to which OPA has been provided access to the extent permitted by applicable law
and collective bargaining agreements, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter 3.29, and in
the same manner and to the same degree as attorney-client privileged materials would be protected
under legal and ethical requirements. They shall also be bound by the confidentiality provisions of
the Criminal Records Privacy Act (Chapter 10.97 RCW) and Public Disclosure Act (RCW 42.17.250
et seq.). No complainant, named employee, or witness involved in an OPA investigation shall be
identified in any public report required by this Chapter 3.29.
Subchapter II Office of Inspector General
3.29.100 Office of Inspector General established – Purpose and authority
A. There is established as a separate and independent office of the City within the Office
of the City Auditor an OIG to provide robust civilian oversight of the effectiveness and
responsiveness of SPD and OPA management and operations, as well as accountability
and criminal justice system operations and practices that involve SPD or OPA. The OIG
is an essential component of the checks and balances that comprise the police oversight
system.
B. The work of the OIG is intended to further instill confidence and public trust in the
effectiveness and professionalism of SPD and in the fairness and integrity of the police
accountability system by providing an independent perspective on the efficacy of the
policies, procedures, and practices of SPD, OPA, and related City departments and
agencies, and by providing additional professional review of OPA investigations.
15
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
C. The OIG shall provide objective, third party review of misconduct complaint-handling
and investigations, and other OPA activities.
D. The OIG shall have primary responsibility, following the conclusion of the Settlement
Agreement, to ensure ongoing fidelity to organizational reforms implemented pursuant
to the goals of the Settlement Agreement to ensure constitutional, accountable, effective,
and respectful policing.
E. The OIG shall have responsibility to oversee and audit police activities to ensure the
ongoing integrity of SPD processes and operations.
F. The OIG shall review evidence-based research and successful police practices in other
jurisdictions and make recommendations based on such reviews to City policymakers
for increasing the effectiveness of SPD and related criminal justice system processes.
G. The OIG shall have the authority to review and audit policies and practices of other City
departments and agencies in areas related to policing and criminal justice matters.
H. The OIG shall make recommendations for the City budget, the City’s state legislative
agenda, and City collective bargaining agreements regarding police accountability and
related matters.
3.29.105 Office of Inspector General – Independence
A. The OIG shall exercise discretionary and oversight responsibilities granted by this
Chapter 3.29 without interference from the Chief of Police, other SPD employees, or
other City officials, except that the Inspector General and OIG staff shall be subject to
oversight as set forth in this Chapter 3.29. Any person who violates these provisions
may be subject to dismissal, discipline, or censure consistent with City and State laws.
B. The Inspector General shall have authority for the hiring, supervision, and discharge of
all OIG staff. OIG staff shall collectively have the requisite credentials, skills, and
abilities to fulfill the duties and obligations of the OIG set forth in Chapter 3.29. This
Chapter 3.29 does not require nor preclude the hiring of any OIG staff with sworn
experience.
C. An annual budget to support sufficient staffing and resources for effective OIG
operations shall be based on not less than x percent (x%) of SPD’s annual
appropriations. The Inspector General shall have budget and program control of the OIG
operations.
D. The Inspector General shall independently set the OIG’s workplan. However, the
Inspector General shall meet with the CPC annually to review a draft of the OIG’s
workplan. At this meeting, the CPC may identify additional specific areas for
investigation and evaluation by the OIG that in the CPC’s judgment are needed to ensure
constitutional policing and public trust in SPD and in related criminal justice practices.
These identified areas shall be incorporated into the annual OIG workplan. The OIG’s
annual workplan shall also make provision for the investigation and evaluation of
16
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
emergent issues identified by the CPC and others during the year which may not be
identified at the time that the annual OIG workplan is adopted.
E. Except where prohibited by law, the OIG shall have timely, full, and direct access to all
relevant City employees, facilities, documents, files, records, and data in OPA, SPD,
and other City departments and agencies which are necessary to perform its duties set
forth in this Chapter 3.29. Should the City decline to provide the OIG access to
documents or data based on attorney-client privilege or because they are open criminal
investigative files, the City shall inform the Inspector General that it is withholding
access on such bases and will provide the Inspector General with an itemization
describing the documents or data withheld. The attorney-client privilege may not be
used to prevent the OIG from observing reviews, meetings, and trainings, such as SPD
administrative investigation unit meetings, disciplinary hearings, or discussions of
misconduct complaint investigations.
F. The OIG is authorized to legally represent itself, including, as necessary, retaining
outside, private legal counsel in any legal matter, enforcement action, or court
proceeding, when the Inspector General determines that the City Attorney’s Office
would have a conflict in representing the interests of the OIG.
3.29.110 Office of Inspector General – Inspector General
A. The duties of the Inspector General are to:
1. Conduct risk management reviews and performance audits, including analysis
of sample and aggregate data to establish patterns and trends, of any and all SPD
and OPA operations, and criminal justice system operations that involve SPD or
OPA. Audits may also be conducted for any areas that may a) involve potential
conflicts of interest; b) involve possible fraud, waste, abuse, inefficiency or
ineffectiveness; c) undermine accountability or ethical standards; or d) otherwise
compromise the public’s trust in the police or the criminal justice system.
2. Review SPD handling of incidents involving death, serious injury, serious use
of force, mass demonstrations, serious property or vehicle damage, or other
issues as determined by the OIG. This may include auditing, monitoring, or other
review of SPD’s administrative investigations or reviews of incidents to assess
the quality, thoroughness, and integrity of the investigations; assessing the
integrity of specific findings from the investigations; and reviewing after-action
reports. To fulfill the OIG’s monitoring obligations of incidents, the Inspector
General or OIG representative(s) designated by the Inspector General, shall have
full authority to respond to any incident scene and have access to the scene to
the extent that they request it. OIG representative(s) may also attend and
participate in SPD administrative investigation unit interviews and meetings,
including Force Review Board meetings, held to review FIT information or
discuss any incidents, including those to which scenes the OIG has responded,
at the Inspector General’s discretion. Whether at the scene of an incident or in
subsequent SPD administrative investigation unit interviews or meetings
concerning any incident, OIG representative(s) may identify areas of concern
17
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
related to issues of possible SPD policy violations, and the integrity,
thoroughness, or objectivity of the investigation or its review.
3. Issue recommendations to improve operations, policies, and practices to address
any systemic problems identified in the OIG’s performance audits and reviews
of specific incidents.
4. The OIG’s audits and reviews may include any and all police operations, for the
purposes of determining whether SPD is meeting its mission to address crime
and improve quality of life through the delivery of constitutional, professional,
and effective police services consistent with best practices, and meeting its
mission in a way that reflects the values of Seattle’s diverse communities. These
audits and reviews may include, but not be limited to:
a. All SPD and OPA policies, regulations, practices, budgets, and consultant
contracts;
b. SPD administrative investigation unit processes, such as force review and
collision review.
c. SPD crime data and SPD’s overall crime data collection and reporting
practices;
d. Recruitment, hiring, post-Academy and in-service training, promotions,
assignments, use of overtime, secondary employment, deployment and
supervision, including command and front-line supervisory functions;
e. The effectiveness of any early intervention or performance mentoring
system in supporting improved officer performance and mitigating
misconduct;
f. Technology and systems of data collection, management, and analysis;
g. The acquisition of, uses, and significant changes to tactical equipment,
vehicles, facilities and uniforms;
h. The accuracy and thoroughness of video recording reviews and the
appropriate recording and retention of video recordings;
i. Patterns, including disparate impacts, in SPD deployment, uses of force,
re-classifications of levels and types of force; stops, arrests, searches, and
interactions with those in behavioral crisis;
j. Incidents of significant concern to the public, such as those involving
injury or death in police custody or the management of demonstrations;
k. Patterns in complaints and misconduct outcomes involving, among other
categories, use of force and biased policing;
18
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
l. Assessment of the fairness, consistency, appropriate application and
effectiveness of imposed discipline in sustained misconduct cases,
including SPD’s compliance with the SPD discipline matrix;
m. Evaluation of the outcomes of appeals and grievances and whether
overturned findings or discipline, or other settlements, suggest
opportunities to improve OPA processes and SPD training;
n. Assessment of inquests, federal and local litigation, and their outcomes,
patterns relating to civil claims and lawsuits alleging SPD misconduct,
payout amounts over time, units disproportionately represented as
subjects of claims and lawsuits, related training, and review of the
investigation of the underlying incidents described in such claims and
lawsuits; and
o. Evaluation of appropriate records retention, and conformity to public
disclosure, open access to information, and privacy standards.
5. Oversee the review of OPA and SPD handling of allegations of misconduct.
a. Each quarter, the OIG shall conduct a random audit of the classifications
of all misconduct complaints from the prior quarter to validate that OPA
classifications were properly assigned for OPA investigation, Supervisor
Action, or an alternative resolution, and that all allegations and employees
associated with the complaints were properly identified. The Inspector
General shall make recommendations to OPA for remedying any
concerns noted in the quarterly audit and report to the CPC the results of
the classification audits and any of the OIG’s associated
recommendations. If the OIG determines that the classification decisions
reflect a need for additional oversight, the OIG may require the OPA
Director to submit each proposed classification decision to the OIG for
review and input prior to OPA making a final classification determination
until such time the OIG is satisfied that such increased involvement in
classifications is no longer needed and quarterly random audits shall
resume.
b. The OIG shall review OPA investigations prior to certification by the
OPA Director to determine whether the investigation was thorough,
timely, and objective. The OPA Director shall submit all initial and
subsequent investigations to the OIG for the OIG’s review sufficiently in
advance of contractual deadlines in order to allow for additional
investigation as requested or directed by the OIG and still ensure
discipline may be imposed should a sustained finding result. The OIG
shall complete its review of initial and subsequent investigations in a
timely manner, so as to also meet contractual deadlines.
1. The OIG shall, after OPA believes an investigation to be
complete, review all investigations involving misconduct
19
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
allegations concerning violations of law; honesty; use of force;
use of force reporting; bias-free policing; integrity; ethics;
professionalism; use of position or authority for personal gain;
conflicts of interest; gifts and gratuities; off-duty conduct;
retaliation; harassment; responsibilities of employees regarding
complaints of misconduct; discretion and authority; primary
investigations; stops, detentions and arrests; or search and
seizure. Additionally, the OIG shall have discretion to direct at
the time of classification or during the investigative process
that any other investigation not including these allegations be
submitted by OPA for review and certification.
2. If the OIG determines that the investigation is thorough, timely,
and objective, the OIG shall certify it and the OPA Director
may then proceed to issue recommended findings to the Chief
of Police.
3. If the OIG finds that the investigation is not ready to be
certified, the OIG may request or direct further investigation.
Upon completion of any additional work requested or directed
by the OIG, the case shall be re-submitted to the OIG for
certification before the OPA Director may issue proposed
findings.
4. If additional investigation is requested by the Chief of Police
after a due process hearing, as allowed under collective
bargaining agreements, the case shall be re-submitted to the
OIG for re-certification following the additional investigation.
5. After reviewing the investigation, the OIG shall document in
writing the case as a) certified as thorough, timely, and
objective; b) not certified at that point because the investigation
is not thorough, timely, and objective but additional
investigation is not requested or directed, and the reason; or c)
not certified because the investigation is not thorough and
objective, along with any requested or directed further
investigation to be conducted by OPA or a request to meet with
the OPA Director to discuss possible further investigation.
Should additional investigation be requested or directed by the
OIG, upon completion of the additional investigatory work, the
investigation shall be re-submitted for certification. The
certification memorandum by the OIG shall be included as an
exhibit in the case file indicating the date of review, whether
the case has been certified, whether further action is requested
or directed, and if not certified, the reasons. Criteria the OIG
should consider in reviewing investigations include, but are not
limited to: (a) whether witnesses were contacted, interviewed,
and all other material evidence was timely collected; (b)
20
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
whether interviews were thorough and unbiased and conflicting
testimony was sufficiently addressed; (c) whether additional
clarifying information would strengthen the investigation; (d)
whether the written summary and analysis are objective and
accurately reflect the evidence; and (e) whether applicable
OPA procedures were followed and the intake and
investigation were conducted in accordance with the OPA
Manual.
6. If within ten (10) days after being notified that an investigation
has been preliminarily completed, the OIG has not advised
OPA of concerns with the investigation, the OPA Director may
certify the case and issue findings. In these instances, the OIG
is precluded from requiring further investigation.
7. If the OIG determines an investigation is not thorough, timely,
or objective, and that additional investigation cannot or did not
remedy the concern, the OPA Director must include this
determination in the recommended findings and the Chief of
Police may take the OIG’s non-certification into account in
making a final findings determination.
c. Through semi-annual review, assess the thoroughness and timeliness of
OPA complaint-handling for those cases not investigated, including cases
referred to supervisors, mediated, or resolved through alternative
resolution, and for the timely and substantive follow-through on OPA
recommendations for Management Actions and Training Referrals.
d. The OIG shall review and comment on any revisions proposed by OPA
to the OPA Manual in accordance with an established process that
provides for consultation and input prior to final adoption of the OPA
Manual.
6. Handle complaints involving OPA staff where a potential conflict of interest
precludes OPA from handling the complaint.
7. Issue a subpoena if evidence or testimony necessary to perform the duties of the
OIG set forth in this Chapter 3.29 is not provided voluntarily, in order to compel
non-SPD witnesses to produce such evidence or testimony. If the subpoenaed
individual or entity does not respond to the request in a timely manner, the
Inspector General may ask for the assistance of the City Attorney to pursue
enforcement of the subpoena through a court of competent jurisdiction.
8. Should an arbitrator be used by the City for hearing disciplinary appeals,
designate an independent body, such as an established bar association committee
with arbitration expertise, to compile a list of arbitrators meeting certain
qualifications identified in writing by the Inspector General. Persons identified
on the list shall be available to hear one or more disciplinary appeals in the
21
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
subsequent three (3) or more years. To encourage timeliness in appeals and
ensure decisions are issued without concern for future selection, both initially
and going forward, appointments to the arbitration list to fill vacancies shall
follow the same process as used to establish an initial list. No arbitrators shall
be subject to approval or disapproval by either the City or the police unions
either at the time they are added to the list or when drawn at random to preside
over a disciplinary appeal. An arbitrator may only be removed from the list if
the Inspector General determines, in writing, that the arbitrator fails to meet the
minimum qualifications for serving as such. Should a hearing examiner be used,
the OIG shall establish qualifications, conduct a hiring process, and nominate a
hearing examiner, subject to City Council confirmation.
9. Perform the police intelligence auditor functions defined in Chapter 14.12.
10. Advise the Mayor, City Attorney, City Council, Chief of Police, OPA Director,
and the CPC on issues related to the purposes of this Chapter 3.29, and
recommend and promote to policymakers changes to policies and practices,
collective bargaining agreements, City ordinances, and State laws in order to
support systemic improvements and other enhancements to SPD performance
and in furtherance of public trust.
11. Provide technical assistance to the CPC, as requested.
12. Maintain and promote use of a whistleblower hotline to receive anonymous
reports from the public and City employees of unethical or improper conduct,
and other issues germane to OIG audits and reviews.
13. Maintain a robust website that is easy to navigate; and conduct community
outreach to inform the public about the OIG’s role and scope of responsibilities.
Collaborate with the CPC to regularly update and provide OIG informational
materials that are readily understandable and widely available to Seattle’s
diverse residents both in English and in translation. Obtain information about
community perspectives and concerns germane to the OIG’s oversight
responsibilities by coordinating with the CPC on community outreach and
receiving feedback from the CPC on issues surfaced as a result of its community
outreach activities.
B. Qualifications.
The Inspector General shall be a civilian with a background in criminal, civil rights, labor
law, governmental investigations, and/or the management of governmental auditing and
shall not be required to have law enforcement experience. The Inspector General shall have
a demonstrated ability to lead staff in auditing, evaluating, and conducting investigations;
conducting financial and performance audits; analyzing and assessing complex aggregate
data for patterns and trends; and in recommending systemic improvements to policies and
practices to support constitutional policing, ongoing system effectiveness, and police
excellence. The Inspector General shall also have the following additional qualifications
and characteristics:
22
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
1. A reputation for integrity and professionalism, and the ability to maintain a high
standard of integrity and professionalism in the office;
2. A commitment to and knowledge of the need for and responsibilities of law
enforcement, including enforcement and care-taking, and the need to protect the
basic constitutional rights of all affected parties;
3. A commitment to the statements of purpose and policies in this Chapter 3.29;
4. A history of leadership experience;
5. The ability to relate, communicate, and engage effectively with and gain the
respect of all who have a stake in policing, including, but not limited to, the
general public, complainants, disenfranchised communities, SPD employees, and
relevant City and other officials including the Mayor, City Council, City
Attorney, Chief of Police, OPA Director, and the CPC;
6. An understanding of the city’s ethnic and socio-economic diversity, and proven
experience working with and valuing the perspectives of diverse groups and
individuals; and
7. The ability to exercise sound judgment, independence, fairness, and objectivity,
and to carry out the duties of the Inspector General in a manner that is perceived
by all who have a stake in policing as exercising sound judgment, independence,
fairness, and objectivity in an environment where controversy is common.
In addition to the above qualifications and characteristics, it may be helpful for the Inspector
General to have appropriate professional auditing credentials and/or at least five (5) years’
experience in law enforcement oversight.
C. Appointment, removal and compensation
1. The Inspector General shall be appointed and reappointed by the City Council.
The CPC shall serve as the search committee for the Inspector General,
identifying up to three qualified finalists using merit-based criteria. In the event
the search committee does not identify a sufficient number of qualified finalists
or the City Council rejects the finalists offered, the search committee shall
conduct a subsequent search for up to three qualified finalists. Prior to the City
Council selecting an appointee from among the finalists, a public meeting shall
be convened to allow community members to ask questions and hear from the
finalists their perspectives on their qualifications and the requirements of the
position. Following the public meeting, the City Council may appoint from
among the finalists. The City Council shall consult with the CPC prior to
reappointments. The Inspector General shall assume office upon formal
appointment by the full City Council.
2. The Inspector General may be appointed for up to three, four-year terms for a
23
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
total of twelve years, each year commencing on July 1st. If the Inspector General
assumes office mid-term due to a prior vacancy, the Inspector General may
complete that term and then be reappointed for up to three, four-year subsequent
terms.
3. Each appointment and reappointment shall be made whenever possible
sufficiently prior to the expiration of the latest incumbent’s term of office,
permitting City Council action to appoint or reappoint at least forty-five (45)
days before the expiration of the present term, so as to have a seamless transition
without a gap in oversight.
4. Within five (5) business days after a vacancy occurs or the City Council learns
that a vacancy is expected to occur, the City Council shall provide written notice
of the vacancy or expected vacancy to the CPC which shall commence
recruitment of candidates to fill the vacancy.
5. Within one hundred and twenty (120) days of notice by the City Council, the
CPC shall identify an initial set of qualified finalists and forward to the City
Council their resumes and other relevant information, including criteria relied
on by the CPC in choosing the finalists. The CPC may rank the finalists and
summarize the particular strengths of each candidate. The City Council shall
provide written notice to the CPC within five (5) business days of its action to
not appoint.
6. In the event of a vacancy, the City Council president shall designate an interim
Inspector General within thirty (30) days after a vacancy occurs to serve until a
new Inspector General is appointed. The interim Inspector General may be either
an OIG employee or an individual from outside the OIG, but must meet the
qualifications in Section 3.29.110.
7. To strengthen the independence of the Inspector General, the City Council may
remove the Inspector General from office only for cause, and in accordance with
the following provisions. The City Council shall give written notice, specifying
the basis for the intended removal, to the Inspector General and the CPC. Within
ten (10) days after receipt of the notice, the Inspector General may file with the
City Council a request for a hearing on the cause for removal. The Inspector
General’s request for a hearing shall be delivered at the same time to the Mayor
and to the CPC Executive Director and CPC co-chairs. If such request is made,
the City Council shall convene a hearing on the cause for removal not sooner
than thirty (30) days and not more than sixty (60) days following the Inspector
General’s request for a hearing, at which the Inspector General may appear, be
represented by publicly-funded counsel, and be heard. Following the City
Council’s notice, and any hearing held at the request of the Inspector General,
the City Council shall finalize its review of the grounds for removal and by a
majority vote of its members approve or not approve the removal within thirty
(30) days of the hearing if held, or if no hearing is held, within thirty (30) days
of issuing notice of the intended removal, following input from the CPC.
24
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
8. The Inspector General shall be paid a salary consistent with the level of
responsibility established in this Section 3.29.110.
9. The Seattle Department of Human Resources shall obtain from an outside law
enforcement agency a thorough background check of nominees for Inspector
General identified by the City Council and report the results to the City Council,
prior to the City Council taking final action on the appointment.
3.29.115 Office of Inspector General – Reporting
A. The Inspector General shall report quarterly to the Mayor, City Council, and the CPC
on the implementation of, or response to, OIG recommendations for policy and practice
improvements, providing information on their status and whether follow-through was
timely and substantive.
B. To effectuate the purposes of this Chapter 3.29, the Inspector General shall, in addition
to the timely publishing of OIG audits and studies, issue an annual public report that
summarizes the results of the OIG’s oversight of OPA’s complaint-handling system, its
review or investigation of other incidents of significant public concern, its analyses of
patterns and trends, its performance audits, and its assessment of research and successful
practices in other jurisdictions. This report shall include any OIG recommendations for
changes in policies and practices, collective bargaining agreements, City ordinances,
and State laws. The annual report shall also detail the implementation status of any
previous OIG policy and practice recommendations to SPD, OPA, or other City
departments and agencies. The annual report shall also summarize information received
from its whistleblower hotline and from community outreach which has informed its
work.
1. With respect to the OIG’s oversight of SPD’s complaint-handling system, the
annual report shall contain a general description of the complaints and cases
reviewed, and should include, but not be limited to:
a. The number of investigations reviewed, a description of those cases in which
the OIG did not certify, those cases for which the OIG requested or required
further investigation, and a description of OPA's follow-up;
b. The semi-annual reviews of OPA complaint-handling for cases not
investigated by OPA, including Contact Logs, Supervisor Action referrals,
mediation, rapid adjudication, Management Actions and Training Referrals;
c. A description of any concerns or trends noted in OPA complaint intake and
investigations;
d. A description of other issues, problems, and trends noted by the OIG as a
result of the OIG’s oversight;
e. Recommendations that SPD or OPA make policy, practice, training, or
procedural changes;
25
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
f. Findings from audits of OPA records or the OPA Director's reports; and
g. Other information, as appropriate, including information requested by the
CPC that would help make reporting as useful as possible to the public.
C. The Inspector General shall deliver a preliminary draft of the reports to the Chief of
Police, the OPA Director, and other City departments and agencies, as appropriate, for
review and comment. They shall review and comment on the preliminary report to the
Inspector General within ten (10) days after receipt of the report. They shall not release
or distribute the report to others during the review period. The Inspector General shall
then issue the final report within ten (10) days after receipt of any comments.
D. The Inspector General shall collaborate with the CPC to make OIG reports readily
understandable and deliver them through channels that are easily accessible to the broad
public.
E. The OIG shall post online and electronically distribute its reports to the Mayor, City
Attorney, City Council, Chief of Police, OPA Director, and the CPC, as well as to the
City Clerk for filing as a public record.
3.29.120 Office of Inspector General – Meetings
A. The Inspector General shall meet with the CPC, its committees, and/or staff, regularly
and at the CPC’s request, to provide and receive information concerning SPD and the
police accountability system, and the extent to which the purposes and requirements of
this Chapter 3.29 are being met. The Inspector General shall review all of the OIG’s
reports, recommendations, and the implementation status of those recommendations in
these meetings with the CPC.
B. The Inspector General shall meet periodically with the Mayor, City Attorney, City
Council, and Chief of Police, to advise on the performance and functions of OPA and
SPD and make recommendations to improve OPA and SPD policies and practices,
consistent with the purposes of this Chapter 3.29.
3.29. 125 Office of Inspector General – Confidentiality of files and records
The Inspector General and all OIG staff, consultants, and experts hired by the OIG shall keep
confidential the identity of all complainants, named employees, and witnesses, as well as all
documents, files, records, and data to which the OIG has been provided access to the extent permitted
by applicable law and collective bargaining agreements, in accordance with the provisions of this
Chapter 3.29, and in the same manner and to the same degree as attorney-client privileged materials
would be protected under legal and ethical requirements. They shall also be bound by the
confidentiality provisions of the Criminal Records Privacy Act (Chapter 10.97 RCW) and Public
Disclosure Act (RCW 42.17.250 et seq.). No complainant, named employee, or witness involved in
an OIG audit shall be identified in any public report required by this Chapter 3.29.
26
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
Subchapter III Community Police Commission
3.29. 200 Community Police Commission established – Purpose and authority
A. One of the cornerstones of effective oversight of law enforcement is community
involvement. The purpose of the CPC is to provide the public with meaningful
participatory oversight of SPD policies and practices of particular significance to the
public or affecting public trust in accord with the purposes of this Chapter 3.29 with the
goal that police services are delivered in a lawful and nondiscriminatory manner and are
in alignment with the values and expectations of the community. The work of the CPC
is intended to further instill confidence and public trust in the fairness and integrity of
the police accountability system and in the effectiveness and professionalism of SPD.
B. The CPC was originally established by ordinance with responsibilities under a
Settlement Agreement between The City of Seattle and the United States Department
of Justice. The additional and ongoing responsibilities of the CPC detailed in this
Chapter 3.29 are separate from those under Subchapter IX of Chapter 3.14, to make
clear the City’s intention that civilian oversight be enhanced and broadened beyond the
limited time and scope initially set forth in the Settlement Agreement in order to better
serve the public.
C. The CPC shall not serve as a review board for individual OPA investigations, nor seek
to influence the course or outcome of specific OPA investigations, or findings,
discipline, or other remedial action recommended or imposed.
3.29.205 Community Police Commission – Independence
A. The CPC is situated within the City of Seattle's Executive Department, but is self-
governing and functionally independent. An annual budget to support sufficient staffing
and resources for effective CPC operations shall be based on not less than x percent
(x%) of SPD’s annual appropriations. In addition, the City shall provide the CPC with
sufficient resources necessary to fulfill its periodic search committee obligations as
required under this Chapter 3.29. The CPC shall have budget and program control of its
own operations, and the Executive Director shall have authority for the hiring,
supervision, and discharge of all CPC staff.
B. The CPC's independence is critical to its ability to perform its oversight role effectively.
SPD employees and City officials shall respect the obligation of Commissioners and
CPC staff to exercise independent judgment and offer critical analysis. The CPC shall
exercise discretionary and oversight responsibilities granted by this Chapter 3.29
without interference from the Chief of Police, other SPD employees, or other City
officials. Any person who violates these provisions may be subject to dismissal,
discipline, or censure consistent with City and State laws.
C. The Executive Director shall be selected by the CPC using merit-based criteria, subject
to confirmation by a majority affirmative vote of the City Council. The CPC may
remove the Executive Director from office at will, upon a majority vote of its
membership. To maintain independence, the CPC Executive Director shall receive
27
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
programmatic direction only from the CPC. The CPC may adopt bylaws to govern its
own activities.
3.29.210 Community Police Commission – Commission
A. The duties of the CPC are to:
1. Review and provide input to OPA, the OIG, SPD, and other City departments
and agencies, including the Mayor, City Council, and City Attorney on the
police accountability system and SPD policies and practices of significance to
the public, consistent with the purposes of this Chapter 3.29. Such review may
include input on policy and practice changes recommended by the OPA
Director, the Inspector General, and SPD.
2. Review and comment annually on any revisions proposed by OPA to the OPA
Manual, in accordance with a process that provides for input prior to final
adoption.
3. Engage in community outreach to obtain the perspectives of community
members and SPD employees on police-community relations, SPD policies and
practices, the police accountability system, and other matters consistent with the
purposes of this Chapter 3.29. In conducting public outreach, the CPC shall be
responsible for maintaining connections with representatives of disenfranchised
communities and with other community groups in all of the City’s legislative
districts, as well as with SPD demographic and precinct advisory councils. The
CPC shall provide OPA and the OIG with community feedback relevant to their
operations received as a result of its public outreach activities.
4. Review and provide input on all memoranda of understanding provisions
between the Chief of Police and the OPA Director prior to their finalization for
consistency with the purposes of this Chapter 3.29.
5. Monitor and report on the implementation by City elected officials, SPD, and
OPA of policy and practice recommendations made by the OPA Director, the
Inspector General, and the CPC, including monitoring, tracking, and reporting
on the City’s budget, state legislative agenda, and collective bargaining agenda
as these relate to advocacy for, and implementation of, recommendations by the
oversight entities.
6. Review and provide input into SPD recruiting, hiring, and promotional practices.
7. Meet with the OPA Director and the Inspector General, no less than quarterly,
to review information they wish to provide the CPC concerning the effectiveness
of SPD or any obstacles to the OPA Director's or the Inspector General’s abilities
to perform their duties.
8. Review reports required by this Chapter 3.29 and any recommendations of the
OPA Director and the Inspector General.
28
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
9. Serve as the search committee for OPA Directors and Inspectors General,
identifying qualified finalists and advising the Mayor on these appointments,
and review and provide input to the Mayor on the reappointment or removal of
OPA Directors and Inspectors General.
10. Annually review the effectiveness of the OPA Director and the Inspector
General after soliciting public, Mayoral, City Attorney, City Council, Chief of
Police, and SPD employee perspectives.
11. Advise the Mayor, City Attorney, City Council, Chief of Police, OPA Director,
and Inspector General on issues related to the purposes of this Chapter 3.29, and
recommend and promote to policymakers changes to policies and practices,
collective bargaining agreements, City ordinances, and State laws in order to
support systemic improvements and other enhancements to SPD performance
and in furtherance of community trust.
12. Convene an annual meeting to receive public comments and to formally report
to the community on the effectiveness of the police accountability system,
including providing an update on the implementation status of any previously
recommended improvements.
13. Serve as an advisory body to the OPA Director and the Inspector General,
identifying problems and recommending improvements to police accountability,
including ways to make the system more accessible and transparent to the public.
14. Consult with OPA and the OIG on the development, revision, and distribution
of public and employee informational materials and on the OPA and OIG
websites.
15. Collaborate with SPD, OPA, and the City Attorney's Office in improving system
transparency, including improving SPD public disclosure procedures and
providing for timely online posting by OPA of information about the status of
investigations and their outcomes.
16. Consistent with the purposes of this Chapter 3.29, annually review the OIG’s
workplan and add specific areas for OIG investigation and evaluation, including
emergent issues that arise that in the CPC’s judgment are needed to support
public confidence in SPD and related criminal justice practices. In adding areas
to the workplan, the CPC shall take into account the budget constraints of the
OIG and its need to balance a range of priorities.
17. Analyze closed OPA cases and any other SPD or OPA data to identify
opportunities for systemic improvements, provided that no such analysis shall
be conducted for the purpose of confirming or overturning any findings,
discipline, or other remedial action recommended or imposed related to any
specific OPA investigations.
29
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
18. Convene meetings with and lead stakeholders in developing a complainant
appeal process for the City to adopt that is consistent with employee due process
rights. Once established, the CPC shall periodically review the fairness and
effectiveness of the civilian appeal process.
19. Convene meetings with and lead stakeholders to assess the feasibility of
establishing mechanisms to use investigation and review processes wholly
external to SPD for cases involving serious and deadly uses of force.
20. To the extent not otherwise covered above, continue to fulfill the responsibilities
of the CPC as set forth in the Settlement Agreement and Memorandum of
Understanding in United States of America v. City of Seattle.
B. Qualifications.
1. Commissioners shall be respected members of Seattle’s many diverse
communities, and include a representative from the Seattle Police Officers Guild
(SPOG) and a representative from the Seattle Police Management Association
(SPMA). Commissioners shall reside or work in Seattle.
2. Collectively, Commissioners shall have a deep understanding of community
interests and needs, all shall have general knowledge of police accountability
matters, and some shall have extensive subject matter expertise, including in the
areas of law enforcement oversight, human rights, civil rights and civil liberties,
and cultural competency. Altogether, there shall be a balance that allows the
CPC as a whole to benefit from the knowledge and expertise of its individual
members.
3. Commissioners shall be representative of Seattle's diverse population, drawn
from different racial and ethnic groups, including immigrant/refugee
communities, and from the LGBTQ, youth, faith, business, and other
communities reflecting the overall demographics of Seattle residents. Some
shall represent or be knowledgeable of the issues of those who are limited-
English speakers, homeless, or who have mental illness and substance abuse
disorders, or shall be drawn from communities that have had difficulties in their
interactions with SPD.
4. Individual Commissioners shall have expertise in law enforcement; police
accountability; human resources; community engagement; organizational
change; constitutional, criminal, or labor law; social justice; training; or other
disciplines important to the CPC’s work. At least two Commissioners shall be
graduates of an accredited law school and members in good standing of the
Washington State Bar Association, with significant experience in the fields of
public defense and civil liberties law. The representatives from SPOG and
SPMA shall be nominated by their respective union executive boards/boards of
directors and should have background relevant to police-community relations
and demonstrated connection to the membership of their respective unions.
30
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
5. All Commissioners shall have the following qualifications and characteristics:
a. A reputation for integrity and professionalism, and for effectiveness in a
board or commission role;
b. A commitment to and understanding of the need for and responsibilities of
law enforcement, including enforcement and care-taking, and the need to
protect the basic constitutional rights of all affected parties;
c. A commitment to the statements of purpose and policies in this Chapter 3.29;
d. A history of leadership experience and/or deep roots in communities
represented;
e. The ability to relate, communicate, and engage effectively with and gain the
respect of all who have a stake in policing, including, but not limited to, the
general public, complainants, disenfranchised communities, SPD employees,
and relevant City and other officials including the Mayor, City Council, City
Attorney, Chief of Police, OPA Director, Inspector General, and other CPC
members.
f. An understanding of the city’s ethnic and socio-economic diversity, and
proven experience working with and valuing the perspectives of diverse
groups and individuals; and
g. The ability to exercise sound judgment, independence, fairness, and
objectivity, and to carry out Commissioner duties in a manner that is
perceived by all who have a stake in policing as exercising sound judgment,
independence, fairness, and objectivity in an environment where controversy
is common.
C. Appointment, removal and compensation
1. The CPC shall consist of 19 Commissioners, appointed and reappointed by the
Mayor and the CPC, subject to confirmation by a majority affirmative vote of the
City Council.
2. Commissioners serving at the time this ordinance is effective shall continue in
office, with staggered terms consistent with the provisions outlined in this Section
3.29.210.
a. Fifteen (15) days prior to the effective date of this Chapter 3.29, each
Commissioner of the previously existing CPC, created by the Settlement
Agreement and Stipulated Order of Resolution Between the United States of
America and the City of Seattle and established by Executive Order No. 02-
2012 and City of Seattle Ordinance 124021, shall submit a written statement
to the Mayor and the President of the City Council indicating whether that
member wishes to serve on the CPC as established by Chapter 3.29. Public
31
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
defender, civil liberties, SPOG and SPMA representatives on the previously
existing CPC shall identify themselves as such in their written statements.
b. No fewer than ten (10) days prior to the effective date of this Chapter 3.29,
the City Attorney or a designee of the City Attorney shall, in a publicly
noticed and open meeting, draw numbers to determine the position number
for each continuing Commissioner (from Position No. 1 to Position No. 15),
with the exceptions that the public defender and civil liberties representatives
shall occupy Position Nos. 16 and 17, and the SPOG and SPMA
representatives shall occupy Position Nos. 18 and 19, respectively, without
the need to draw numbers. All position numbers not drawn shall be considered
vacant positions, subject to appointment pursuant to the provisions of this
Section 3.29.210.
c. Commissioners in Position Nos. 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, and 19 shall serve terms
on the CPC deemed to end on December 31, 2018. Commissioners in Position
Nos. 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, and 17 shall serve terms deemed to end on December 31,
2017. Commissioners in Position Nos. 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 shall serve terms
deemed to end on December 31, 2016.
d. All Commissioners shall be eligible for two (2) subsequent three-year terms
following the initial terms defined in this Section 3.29.210.
3. The Mayor shall select seven (7) Commissioners, including the SPOG and SPMA
representatives who shall be nominated by their respective unions. The CPC shall
select the remaining twelve (12) Commissioners. Each appointing authority shall
provide a process that allows individuals to apply and be considered for
appointment, to ensure that they meet the qualifications outlined in this Section
3.29.210 and are selected in a manner that effectuates the bylaws of the CPC with
respect to its composition. The Mayor shall consult with the CPC prior to making
reappointments. Commissioners shall assume office upon receiving City Council
confirmation.
4. Commissioners may be appointed for up to three, three-year staggered terms for
a total of nine years, each year commencing on January 1st. The staggered terms
shall be such that no more than ten (10) Commissioners’ terms expire in any year.
If a Commissioner assumes office mid-term due to a prior vacancy, the
Commissioner may complete that term and then be reappointed for up to three,
three-year subsequent terms.
5. Each appointment and reappointment shall be made whenever possible
sufficiently prior to the expiration of the latest incumbent’s term of office or the
effective date of an incumbent’s resignation, permitting City Council action to
approve or disapprove the appointment or reappointment, at least forty-five (45)
days before the expiration of the present term, so as to avoid undue vacancy. All
appointments to fill positions due to resignations without notice shall be made as
soon as such can reasonably be done, but no later than three months after the
effective date of the resignation of the latest incumbent.
32
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
6. Removal of Commissioners from office by the appointing authority may only be
for cause, with written notice, specifying the basis for the intended removal, to
the involved Commissioner and the City Council. The City Council shall finalize
its de novo review of the grounds for removal and by a majority vote of its
members approve or not approve the removal within thirty (30) days of receiving
notice of the intended removal from the appointing authority.
7. Commissioners shall be compensated, if at all, as provided by ordinance.
D. Staff
Sufficient professional staff shall be provided by the City to enable the CPC to perform the
responsibilities specified and fulfill its duties under this Chapter 3.29 initially, and on an
ongoing basis.
3.29.215 Community Police Commission – Reporting
A. The CPC shall post online and electronically distribute an annual report to the Mayor,
City Attorney, City Council, Chief of Police, OPA Director, and Inspector General, as
well as to the City Clerk for filing as a public record. This report shall describe the work
of the CPC in fulfilling the responsibilities detailed in this Chapter 3.29, including:
1. The extent to which the purpose, duties, and responsibilities detailed in this
Chapter 3.29 have been met;
2. The extent to which prior recommendations for improvements to SPD and OPA
policies, practices, systems, training, and the accountability system have been
implemented; and, if they have not, the reasons;
3. Any new CPC recommendations for systemic, training, engagement, policy, and
practice changes; and
4. Information about the CPC’s outreach, and about the perspectives gathered by
the CPC from such outreach.
3.29.220 Community Police Commission – Meetings
A. The CPC shall meet regularly with the OPA Director and the Inspector General to
provide and receive information concerning SPD and the police accountability system,
and the extent to which the purposes and requirements of this Chapter 3.29 are being
met.
B. The CPC shall periodically meet with the Mayor, City Attorney, City Council, and Chief
of Police, to advise on the performance and functions of OPA and SPD, and discuss its
work under this Chapter 3.29.
C. The CPC shall hold regular public meetings, no less than once a month, and establish
33
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
workgroup subcommittees of its members to meet as necessary.
Subchapter IV Mechanisms to Support Accountability
3.29.300 Reporting of Potential Misconduct and Police Accountability Issues
A. SPD shall establish and maintain clear written policies requiring that all significant
matters coming to SPD’s attention that involve potential police misconduct or policy
violations are documented and forwarded in a timely manner to OPA, including cases
originating from outside sources and from all SPD units or boards with authority to
review compliance with policy or to conduct administrative investigative processes.
B. SPD and OPA shall establish an effective system of referral to OPA for investigation of
possible misconduct any concerns regarding officers whom others in the criminal justice
system believe may have not acted with integrity or honesty.
C. SPD, OPA, the City Attorney’s Office, the CPC, and all other City entities shall have
an affirmative obligation to report monthly to the Inspector General any problems or
deficiencies related to operations, policies, programs, and practices that would
reasonably be expected to adversely affect SPD effectiveness, public safety, police
accountability, constitutional policing, or the public’s confidence in SPD, and that
would be relevant to the duties of the OIG.
D. As appropriate, the City Attorney shall advise the OPA Director and the Chief of Police
of any issues identified through litigation, grievances, or disciplinary appeals to help
OPA and SPD make informed improvements to policies and procedures.
3.29.305 Continuous Improvement
A. SPD shall meet and confer with the issuing agency following the issuance of any report
with recommendations by the OPA Director, the Inspector General, or the CPC and
shall respond in writing to the issuing agency within thirty (30) days following the
release of recommendations by the OPA Director, the Inspector General, or the CPC,
providing a plan for implementation of accepted recommendations, including for
regular timely written reports on progress made in implementing accepted
recommendations, and a rationale or other explanatory information for those
recommendations not accepted or scheduled for implementation. If the lead entity
responsible for the implementation is a City department or agency other than SPD, the
Director of the Mayor’s Office of Policy and Innovation or its successor shall coordinate
providing the necessary information to SPD to include in the response. The issuing
agency shall be responsible for tracking the status of its recommendations accepted and
not accepted. The OPA Director and the Inspector General shall report quarterly to the
CPC on the status of their recommendations to SPD and other City departments and
agencies.
B. OPA shall meet and confer with the issuing agency following the issuance of any report
with recommendations by the Inspector General or the CPC and shall respond in writing
to the issuing agency within thirty (30) days following the release of recommendations
34
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
of the Inspector General or the CPC, providing a plan for implementation of accepted
recommendations, including regular timely written reports on progress made in
implementing accepted recommendations, and a rationale or other explanatory
information for those recommendations not accepted or scheduled for implementation.
The issuing agency shall be responsible for tracking the status of its recommendations
accepted and not accepted. The Inspector General shall report quarterly to the CPC on
the status of the OIG recommendations to OPA.
C. In consultation with the CPC, the OIG, and the OPA, SPD shall establish an agreed
upon schedule and protocol for regular and timely review of proposed revisions to the
SPD Policy Manual for the purpose of ensuring SPD policies are consistent with best
practices, including incorporation of recommendations from the civilian oversight
entities.
D. If determined to be feasible following the stakeholder assessment led by the CPC
described in Section 3.29.210, the City shall establish mechanisms to use wholly
external investigation and review processes for cases involving serious and deadly uses
of force.
E. SPD shall maintain systems of critical self-analysis, including audits and reviews of
critical events, lawsuits, claims, and complaints. These reviews should focus on ways
to improve policies, training, and supervision so as to help prevent misconduct, policy
violations, poor performance, or other adverse outcomes.
F. SPD shall track and together with the OIG report on the efficacy of any performance
mentoring or early intervention system, which is designed to proactively identify
problems and trigger non-disciplinary coaching and training interventions in order to
improve employee performance.
G. The City Council shall establish a regular schedule for review of the status of
implementation by OPA, SPD, and the City of all recommendations made for improving
the police accountability system.
H. At the time the Mayor’s annual proposed budget is submitted to the City Council, the
Mayor shall notify the City Council and the CPC in writing, with copies to the Inspector
General and the OPA Director, when recommendations requiring City funding made by
those responsible for implementing the purposes of this Chapter 3.29 are not included
in the budget proposal.
I. At the time the Mayor’s proposed state legislative agenda is presented to the City
Council, the Mayor shall notify the City Council and the CPC in writing, with copies to
the Inspector General and the OPA Director, when associated recommendations made
by those responsible for implementing the purposes of this Chapter 3.29 are not included
in the proposed state legislative agenda.
J. At the time the Mayor’s proposed collective bargaining agendas with the City’s police
unions are presented to the Labor Relations Policy Committee, the Mayor shall notify
the City Council and the CPC in writing, with copies to the Inspector General and the
35
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
OPA Director, when associated recommendations made by those responsible for
implementing the purposes of this Chapter 3.29 are not included in any proposed
collective bargaining agenda.
3.29.310 Disciplinary, Grievance, and Appeals Policies and Processes
A. SPD and City disciplinary, grievance, and appeal policies and processes shall be timely,
fair, consistent, and transparent.
1. SPD shall establish and use a discipline matrix to better ensure predictable, fair,
consistent, and uniform application of discipline according to adopted standards
and shall track all records of Chief of Police disciplinary determinations. The
OPA Director and the Inspector General shall have unfettered access to this
information, and SPD shall report on disciplinary patterns in such a way that the
public can assess whether the Chief of Police is exercising disciplinary authority
in a fair and consistent manner.
2. To help ensure timeliness, there shall be set and enforceable timeframes for any
named employee to be notified by SPD of proposed findings and discipline, for
any named employee and/or the named employee’s union representative to
request a due process hearing, for the Chief of Police to issue a final finding and
disciplinary decision, and for any named employee to file an appeal.
3. SPD shall implement discipline when it is imposed or shortly thereafter, not upon
conclusion of any disciplinary appeal process.
4. The Chief of Police shall have the authority to place an SPD employee on leave
without pay prior to the completion of an OPA administrative investigation
regardless of whether the employee has been charged with a felony or
misdemeanor if doing so is in the best interests of the public.
5. Employee disciplinary appeals shall only be through a) a hearing examiner
nominated as a permanent City employee by the Inspector General using merit-
based criteria, who has appropriate expertise and objectivity, or b) through an
arbitrator selected at random from a list of qualified arbitrators maintained by the
OIG, pursuant to Section 3.29.110. All hearings related to disciplinary appeals
shall be open to complainants and the public without limitation.
6. After the CPC leads stakeholders in developing a complainant appeal process,
described in Section 3.29.210, the City shall establish such a process that is
consistent with employee due process rights and with the purposes of this
Chapter 3.29.
7. SPD employees shall not use accrued time balances to be compensated while
satisfying a disciplinary penalty that includes an unpaid suspension.
8. A grievance or disciplinary appeal shall be initiated by the named employee or
the named employee’s union representative by filing notice to the Chief of Police
and the City Attorney concurrently.
36
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
9. Challenges by employees to disciplinary decisions shall be handled through the
appeal process described in this Section 3.20.310. Challenges by employees to all
other administrative actions or working conditions shall be handled exclusively
through a separate employee grievance process.
10. The City Attorney’s Office shall determine legal representation for SPD in
disciplinary challenges. The City, including SPD, shall not settle or resolve
grievances or disciplinary appeals without the approval of the City Attorney's
Office.
11. Each party to a named employee appeal shall have a second attorney who will be
available to reduce appeal hearing scheduling delays, all appeal hearings shall be
held within a set timeframe from when the Chief of Police issues final findings
and discipline, and all appeal rulings shall be issued within a set timeframe from
the hearing.
12. The Chief of Police shall request in writing that the WSCJTC de-certify any
sworn employee terminated from employment, or who would have been
terminated from employment had separation not already occurred, whenever the
nature of the employee’s misconduct qualifies for de-certification under State
law.
3.29.315 Recruitment, Hiring, Assignments, Promotions, and Training
A. SPD shall develop and implement recruitment, hiring, testing, training, mentoring,
assignment, and promotional practices that emphasize leadership and policing skills
consistent with accountability, which support equity and the goals set forth in the
Settlement Agreement. SPD shall evaluate and report on how effective its processes are
in meeting community needs for a diverse work force, including the relevance of
traditional disqualifying factors and the swiftness of decision-making, to assess if there
are unfair impediments to hiring and retaining diverse and skilled officers. In developing
these practices, SPD shall consult with the CPC and rely on its research and
recommendations in these areas.
B. To support operational efficiency and excellence, SPD may use civilians with
specialized skills and expertise to perform any SPD management and operational
functions, including, but not limited to, training, human resources, technology, budget
and finance, crime analysis, recruiting, hiring, and testing, which in the judgment of the
Chief of Police do not require law enforcement commissioned personnel, allowing SPD
the ability to more flexibly deploy civilian and sworn resources to best meet both its
administrative and law enforcement needs.
C. SPD shall adopt through the Public Safety Civil Service Commission rule-making
process, preference points in hiring sworn employees who are multi-lingual and/or have
work experience or educational background providing important skills needed in
modern policing, such as experience working with diverse communities, and social
work, mental health or domestic violence counseling, Peace Corps, AmeriCorps, or
37
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
other similar work or community service backgrounds.
D. After consulting with and receiving input from the OIG, SPD shall establish an internal
office, directed and staffed by civilians, to manage the secondary employment of its
employees. The policies, rules, and procedures for secondary employment shall be
consistent with SPD and City ethical standards, and all other SPD policies shall apply
when employees perform secondary employment work.
E. SPD shall adopt consistent standards that underscore the organizational expectations for
performance and accountability as part of the application process for all specialty units,
in addition to any unique expertise required by these units, such as field training, special
weapons and tactics, crime scene investigation, and the sexual assault unit. In order to
be considered for these assignments, the employee’s performance appraisal record, OPA
history and early intervention system information must meet certain standards and SPD
policy must allow for removal from that assignment if certain triggering events or
ongoing concerns mean the employee is no longer meeting performance or
accountability standards.
F. SPD shall ensure that its “take-home” policy for SPD vehicles, and the opportunities for
assignments that provide additional financial remuneration, are consistent with values
of accountability and effective use of taxpayer resources.
G. The Chief of Police shall collaborate with the OPA Director with the goal that sworn
staff assigned to OPA have requisite skills and abilities and with the goal that the
rotations of sworn staff into and out of OPA are done in such a way as to maintain OPA's
operational effectiveness. A memorandum of understanding between the Chief of Police
and the OPA Director shall memorialize any such agreed-upon arrangements to meet
these goals for sworn staffing of OPA.
H. SPD shall collaborate with OPA in the development and delivery of SPD in-service
training related to the accountability system.
3.29.320 Data Tracking and Record Retention
A. SPD shall maintain a transparent, current, and searchable database that includes every
stop, frisk, use of force, and disciplinary matter. The database shall protect the privacy
of members of the public who are involved, while including all relevant information of
each interaction, including race, gender, time, place, assignment, reason, and any other
consideration that can help provide information regarding possible bias.
B. SPD shall make available information about its policies and operations that are matters
of concern to the public by posting such information online, such as the SPD Policy
Manual, performance audit reports, reviews of shootings by officers, and reviews of in-
custody injuries and deaths.
C. SPD shall track and document OPA cases referred from the OPA Director to the Chief
of Police in OPA and SPD data systems.
38
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
D. All SPD personnel and OPA case files shall be retained as long as the employee is
employed by the City, plus ten (10) years or as long as any action related to that
employee is ongoing, whichever is longer. SPD personnel files shall contain all
associated records, including equal employment opportunity complaints, early
intervention system and disciplinary records, litigation records, and decertification
records; and OPA complaint files shall contain all associated records, including
investigation records, Supervisor Action referrals and outcomes, rapid adjudication
records, and referrals and outcomes of mediations. No employee may petition the Chief
of Police for removal of records of written reprimands or other disciplinary actions from
their personnel files.
E. For sworn employees who are terminated or resign in lieu of termination as a result of
an OPA investigation, such that the employee was or would have been separated from
SPD for cause and at the time of separation was not “in good standing,” SPD shall
include documentation in SPD personnel and OPA case files verifying a) a letter was
sent by SPD to the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission (WSCJTC)
requesting de-certification whenever appropriate; b) whether action was taken by the
WSCJTC in response to such requests; c) that the Chief of Police did not and will not
grant the employee authorization to serve in a Special Commission capacity, as a reserve
officer or as a retired officer in a private company that provides flagging, security, or
related services; and d) that the Chief did not or will not grant any request under the
Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act to carry a concealed firearm. The latter two
actions shall also be taken and documentation included in the SPD personnel and OPA
case files whenever a sworn employee resigns or retires with a pending complaint and
does not fulfill an obligation to fully participate in an OPA investigation.
3.29.325 Criminal Cases
A. The Mayor shall include in the City’s proposed state legislative agenda a provision to
allow the City to refer criminal cases in which police conduct resulted in the death of a
civilian to independent prosecutorial authorities. Until such State law is enacted, the
City Attorney shall establish a protocol with the King County Prosecutor to refer,
whenever possible, such cases to prosecutors not affiliated with the City of Seattle or
King County.
B. The City Attorney shall establish a protocol so that, whenever possible, cases referred
to prosecutors for possible filing of charges against SPD employees are reviewed
concurrently by city, county, and federal prosecutors so as to minimize delay and better
serve both the public, the named employee, and SPD.
3.29.330 Collective Bargaining and Labor Agreements
A. The City’s collective bargaining agenda shall incorporate recommendations made by
those who provide civilian oversight of the police accountability system, who shall also
serve in a technical advisor capacity during the bargaining process for the purpose of
ensuring such recommendations are thoughtfully prioritized and the ramifications of
alternative proposals are correctly understood. Should the City not be prepared to
bargain certain of these recommendations, the City shall bargain for the right to re-open
39
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
so that recommended reforms can be implemented as soon as possible and not delayed
until the next regularly scheduled negotiation period.
B. The terms of all collective bargaining agreements for SPD employees, along with any
separate agreements entered into by SPD or the City in response to an unfair labor
practice complaint, settlement of grievance or appeal, or for other reasons, including
those previously reached, shall be clearly and transparently provided to the public, by
posting on the SPD website, along with plain language explanations of the purpose and
effect of the terms of all such collective bargaining and other agreements.
C. SMC 4.04.120(E) shall not apply to the City’s collective bargaining with police unions.
The City’s collective bargaining with all police unions shall be conducted in an open
and transparent manner to the maximum extent permitted by State law.
D. Whenever collective bargaining occurs, any separate agreements in place which were
entered into by SPD or the City in response to an unfair labor practice complaint,
settlement of grievance or appeal, or for any other reasons, shall be incorporated into
the new or updated collective bargaining agreement or shall be eliminated.
3.29.335 Policy Initiatives and Updates
A. The Mayor shall include in the City’s proposed state legislative agenda reform of State
laws regarding officer de-certification, pension benefits for employees who do not
separate from SPD “in good standing,” and the standards for arbitrators to override
termination decisions by the Chief of Police.
1. The City shall seek to broaden the grounds for revoking officer certification and
to allow for immediate de-certification upon termination or resignation rather
than upon completion of all appeals so that officers who violate the law or
engage in serious misconduct cannot be employed in a sworn capacity anywhere
else in the state.
2. The City shall seek authority to take back, following separation, pension benefits
from future employees who have not satisfied all conditions to receive full
pension benefits because they retire or resign to avoid participation in an OPA
investigation or discipline, or who are terminated or resign in lieu of termination
as a result of an OPA investigation.
3. The City shall seek statutory change to reduce the power of arbitrators to
override certain termination decisions and order the return of sworn employees
who have committed misconduct to work. Such statutory change shall make
clear that in the event any commissioned officer has been found by the
appointing authority to have engaged in an illegal act or other misconduct
warranting termination, the arbitrator shall not substitute his or her judgment for
that of the appointing authority regarding the nature of the discipline and shall
sustain the termination unless the arbitrator also overturns the finding of having
engaged in an illegal act or other misconduct warranting termination.
40
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
B. SPD administrative investigation units, including the Force Review Board, shall
maintain a schedule of review that limits the duration of each incident review to ninety
(90) days.
C. After consulting with and receiving input from the OPA Director, the OIG, and the CPC,
SPD shall revise its body-worn camera and in-car video recording policies, as
appropriate, to ensure their consistency and that they reflect best practices in support of
police accountability. Such policies shall:
1. Clarify when body-worn camera recordings are allowed in private residences
when consent for recording is not given by all persons present.
2. Clarify when body-worn camera recordings are allowed involving victims of
certain types of crimes or individuals in crisis.
3. Clarify when officers are allowed to turn-off body-worn cameras when engaged
with an individual who may wish to provide witness information or act as a
confidential informant but would not do so if a camera was on.
4. Clearly articulate when officers are allowed or not allowed to review their in-car
and body-worn camera recordings, including whether it is permissible a) before
writing a report, b) before any OPA or SPD administrative investigation, and/or
c) before any litigation or hearing.
5. Require in-car and body-worn camera video recording use for premise, as well
as person and vehicle, searches.
6. Determine whether anti-crime team and special weapons and tactics actions are
to be recorded.
7. Determine whether all SPD vehicles used for any law enforcement action, other
than undercover action, including all vans, command, and supervisor vehicles,
must be equipped with in-car video recording capability and, if so, establish the
requirements for employees who would not have routinely done a system check
before using the vehicle.
8. Determine whether SPD personnel may participate in law enforcement action
with officers from a different agency using that agency’s vehicle that is not
equipped with in-car video recording capability.
9. Clarify when those in the chain of command who arrive at a scene to provide
oversight and review of use of force are engaged in police activity and must have
in-car video and body-worn cameras on.
10. Require in-car and body-worn camera video recordings, in accord with SPD
policy, for all secondary employment work when officers are acting with law
enforcement authority and are in uniform.
41
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
11. Allow supervisors the authority to review in-car and body-worn camera video
recordings on a day-to-day basis and discuss these with officers under their
command improve their performance, without such review and discussions
being part of a formal performance appraisal.
3.29.340 Public Statements
A. While any incident of public concern is under any form of City review, including an
OPA investigation, or an SPD Force Review Board or other review, neither the Chief
of Police nor any SPD or other City employee shall comment in a way that suggests that
any factual, policy or legal conclusions have been reached about the incident. These
provisions shall not restrict the ability of a union representative to comment in their
representative capacity.
3.29.345 Protection of Civilian Oversight Entities
A. Retaliation by adverse employment action or harassment against OPA and OIG
employees, against CPC employees or Commissioners, or against employees of other
City departments or agencies who provide information to the OPA, the OIG, or the CPC
undermines the effectiveness of civilian oversight efforts by threatening the continued
flow of information. No person shall retaliate against, punish or penalize any other
person for complaining to, cooperating with or assisting the OPA, the OIG, or the CPC
in the performance of their duties. Any OPA or OIG employee, CPC employee or
Commissioner, or employee of other City departments or agencies who believes he or
she has been retaliated against for making such complaint to, disclosing information to,
or responding to such queries from the OPA, the OIG, or the CPC may report such
action to the Inspector General. If retaliation is suspected, the Inspector General is
authorized to open an investigation into the matter and issue a complaint to the
appropriate authority. Any person who violates these provisions may be subject to
dismissal, discipline, or censure consistent with City and State laws. These protections
shall not apply when the contact was made or the information was disclosed with
knowledge that it was false or with willful disregard for its truth or falsity.
Subchapter V Construction and Implementation
3.29.400 Construction
A. The collective bargaining agreements with the City’s police unions shall be updated to
conform and be consistent with the provisions and obligations of this Chapter 3.29.
B. Any provision of this ordinance that requires collective bargaining shall not become effective
until the City satisfies its collective bargaining obligations under the Public Employees’
Collective Bargaining Act, RCW Ch. 41.56 or the City and the affected police union(s)
mutually agree that the provision may be implemented.
C. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this Chapter 3.29 and any other City
ordinance, the provisions of this Chapter 3.29 shall govern.
42
PROPOSED POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE Approved by CPC, 08-10-16
D. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of
any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the
invalidity of its application to any person or circumstance, does not affect the validity of the
remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstance.
E. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force [xxxxx] days after the effective date of the
ordinance introduced as Council Bill [xxxx]. The terms and provisions of this ordinance are
not retroactive and shall apply only to those rules, orders, actions or proceedings that occur, or
have been initiated, on or after [xxxxx].
3.29.401 Implementation
A. Accountability System Pending Judicial Review
Until such time as the legislation takes effect, the current accountability system shall remain in
place, consistent with provisions of the Settlement Agreement. The City shall provide
sufficient budgetary support and fill any OPA Director and OPA Auditor vacancies with
interim office holders so as to ensure there is no gap in oversight and fulfilling the
responsibilities of those offices.
B. OPA Auditor-Inspector General Transition
The Inspector General shall have the authority to retain the services of past OPA Auditors to
assist in the transition and in fulfilling the OIG’s obligations as set forth in this Chapter 3.29.